Evergreen Field: Empty Or Active?
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Evergreen field: empty or active? Exploring viable ideas 1. What is the future for Evergreen field? When development proposals were rejected in 1997, the Wanstead Society was formed to safeguard this land for Wanstead. It has succeeded in keeping it open, but it remains unused. We have become familiar with the open field, but the land is in limbo: unused, no public access, privately-owned but with planning policy against building, other than where it supports or is ancilliary to the purpose of that open space. What practical use could be made of Evergreen Field, for the benefit of Wanstead? What do we want to see there? These pages consider a future for Evergreen Field – where research, design, purpose and management could lead to a feasible proposal. You are invited to contribute to this. Is there a solution that can be achieved by owner and community working together? Our starting point is to maintain the open character and a beneficial use, based on the current planning permission obtained by the Wanstead Society in 2013. This report was first published on Wansteadium in December 2014. Thank you to all everyone who responded. Comments received have been included. In addition, the report now considers the practicality of achieving different uses. First some background… 2. Facts about the field Why it is special It is part of the distinctive green side to the High Street, giving a significant sense of openness. It provides a setting to the listed Christchurch, Wanstead’s main landmark. It provides a green link between Christchurch Green and Church Path. It makes a positive contribution to the character of the Conservation Area. A brief history Originally, the site was home to two houses, one called Framlingham, the other occupied by Dr Boney, damaged during the war and demolished in the 1960s. The site was then acquired by the Metropolitan Police for a police station but never brought proposals forward. Furlong Homes owned it for many years and failed to get permission for a dreadful development scheme. The Evergreen Trust made a valiant effort to buy the land in the late 1990s, but it was sold on to Gladedale Homes, who sat on it and did nothing. When Dalco Developments bought the land in 2012, there was concern about their development hopes. The Wanstead Society obtained planning permission for multi-use open space in April 2013 – but that needs to be translated into practical steps to bring the land into use and to manage it in the future. Where we are now As the land is privately-owned, it makes sense to develop a dialogue with the owner to explore mutually supported options for future use and management of the land. This will not be simple, but an adversarial approach will be less likely to result in the best solution. Why doesn’t Redbridge Council buy the land? Redbridge Council could not buy the land without a defined need and sound financial and political case. It would be costly and risky for the Council to compulsorily purchase (CPO) and it is not a borough priority for spending limited financial resources. It does not make sense for the Council to buy open space in an area already well-endowed with open space, when other parts of the borough have more pressing community needs. Is there another site that could be swapped with Dalco for the Evergreen Field? If there was an existing community use in the Wanstead area that would suit Evergreen Field, it could swap places. The existing community site would be developed to cover all the costs. The only possible swap was with the Scout Hut near the Eagle at Snaresbrook, but that has just been rebuilt. What is the owner’s position? The owner wants development but understands the public interest and is prepared to allow a reasonable amount of time to work with the community. To demonstrate this, he has withdrawn an unpopular planning application for fences, removed polythene sheets, consulted public health officials about rat problems and cut the grass. How realistic is leaving things as they are – to do nothing? After the 1998 planning refusal and Redbridge policy, the past development company landowners (Furlong and Gladedale) seemed content to leave this land in their land bank. The land was sold in 2012. We can continue to ask the owner to cut the grass and keep it unused, and the current owner has done this, but this makes no business sense for the owner and is not a secure position for the community. Is an empty unused site the best solution to this dilemma? A plan of the field This diagram is a plan of the field. It is one acre in size, located on the west side of High Street, adjoining Christchurch Green and Christchurch. It has a rich variety of trees. HIGH STREET Christchurch Christchurch Green Town planning information • The land has no use in official planning terms. Planning permission is required for any use or development of the land, whether this is related to a recreational use of the land, commercial use or residential use. • There is an Article 4 Direction on the land which was made in February 2002 and removes the permitted development right for the "erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure" meaning that these works require planning permission. • Redbridge Council, the local planning authority, have a policy (reference CR1) in the Borough Wide Primary Policies DPD (2008) that says the dominant character of the land should be as Open Space and that development proposals for the land should be refused unless they are supportive of or ancillary to the purpose of that Open Space. Ancillary uses are subservient to the main uses of the site as open space and might include changing rooms. • Emerging policy within the draft Redbridge Local Plan 2015- 2030 proposes to continue this strong level of planning policy protection. • It is in Wanstead Village conservation area, reflecting the special character of the High Street based on its buildings, townscape and green spaces. • The adjacent Christchurch is a grade ll* listed building. The condition of the land It has a very uneven surface, probably containing buried foundations and filled-in cellars. There is an overgrown air raid shelter near the Christchurch path. The current owners, Dalco Developments, have cooperated with the Wanstead Society by keeping the field tidy. Ownership information The land is owned by Dalco Developments, who bought the land in 2012 from Gladedale Ltd – a housebuilder who had owned the land for several years. Transferring ownership Enquiries have been made informally with the owner to acquire the land. However, the owner is unwilling to sell the land at this time. Compulsory purchase by the Council would be hard to justify and the Council would be unwilling to exercise its powers in this respect. A tentative value of the land in its current condition has been put at about £60,000, albeit the basis of this valuation is unclear. In any event, any buyer would have to agree a price with the owner and of course meet fees for legal services. The buyer would also need to have the proper standing to hold a legal interest in the land (e.g. freehold); this could be an individual or properly incorporated company or trust, or perhaps the Council. A community trust If ownership of any land is transferred for public use, and the Council does not wish to acquire the freehold of the land or any part of it, then it could be held in trust for the benefit of the community by a charitable organization. A trust would plan the future management of the community land and raise funds for all the work needed to bring it into use. Local opinion The Furlong Homes proposal for a building facing the High Street with parking behind and a blank end wall facing the Green stimulated the setting up of the Wanstead Society. There has been resistance to similar development since, reflected in the Council’s policy protecting the open land. Planning permission The Wanstead Society made a planning application for multi-use, community open space, with new fencing, planting and access (reference 2254/12). No planning permission was granted for permanent fixed structures. This was granted in March 2013 and is the only formal status the site has; it will expire in March 2016 if it is not implemented in that time. The permission however requires tree surveys, walls and fences and hard surfacing/ soft landscaping design which are conditions of the approval of the planning permission and must be discharged by Redbridge Council before the use can commence. All of these works will have financial implications for the community that will affect the practicality of implementing this permission. These costs would run into tens of thousands of pounds. Temporary uses Any moveable structure within the site is only allowed up to 28 days in total in any calendar year. In addition any holding of a market is limited up to a maximum of 14 days in total in any calendar year. 3. Considering viable options for the land This report is not merely a list of ideas. It starts to investigate how achievable each idea is in terms of the immediate cost of providing the proposal and the ongoing cost of maintenance. We have to understand how feasible each option would be - to get planning permission, to carry out the works, and to manage in the long term. We have to consider where the funding comes from – crowd-funding, grants or ‘enabling development’.